Sexual Attitudes Scale

Abstract

The Sexual Attitudes Scale, initially developed as the Hendrick Sexual Attitudes Scale (HSAS) by Clyde Hendrick and Susan S. Hendrick in 1987, and subsequently refined into the Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale (BSAS) in 2006, is one of the most widely utilized and rigorously validated psychometric instruments designed to assess multidimensional human sexual attitudes. Emerging from the recognition that human sexual beliefs cannot be adequately captured along a single, simplistic continuum of conservativism versus liberalism, the full-length 43-item HSAS operationalizes sexual ideology across four primary orthogonal and oblique psychological dimensions: Permissiveness (openness to casual, uncommitted, and multi-partner sexual relations), Sexual Practices (evaluations of specific behavioral acts including masturbation, oral sex, and erotica), Communion (the perceived emotional, spiritual, and transcendental bonding capacity of sexual expression), and Instrumentality (the conceptualization of sex as physical release, bodily pleasure, or biological sensation detached from emotional intimacy). Across iterations, responses are recorded on a five-point Likert-type continuum ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. In the 23-item BSAS adaptation, the original practices dimension was revised to capture Birth Control attitudes (endorsing shared contraceptive responsibility), establishing four robust subscales of Permissiveness (10 items), Birth Control (3 items), Communion (5 items), and Instrumentality (5 items). Psychometric investigations consistently confirm robust internal consistency across subscales (Cronbach’s alpha ranging from .71 to .94 in the original HSAS and .75 to .94 in the BSAS) alongside stable four-week test-retest coefficients (.66 to .88). Factor-analytic investigations utilizing exploratory and confirmatory modeling substantiate the four-factor structural construct across diverse demographics, collegiate cohorts, and cross-cultural populations. This comprehensive evaluation delineates the theoretical foundations, structural validity, psychometric properties, scoring methodology, and contemporary academic utility of the instrument.

Keywords

Sexual Attitudes Scale, Hendrick Sexual Attitudes Scale, Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale, Permissiveness, Communion, Instrumentality, Birth Control, Sexual Practices, Human Sexuality, Psychometrics, Factor Analysis, Construct Validity

Authors

The scale was developed and validated by distinguished social psychologists Clyde Hendrick, Ph.D., and Susan S. Hendrick, Ph.D., with contributions across developmental iterations from David A. Reich, Ph.D.

• Clyde Hendrick, Ph.D.: Paul Whitfield Horn Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Department of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States. Dr. Hendrick was an eminent figure in social psychology, interpersonal relationships, love styles (having co-developed the Love Attitudes Scale), and advanced psychometric methodology.
• Susan S. Hendrick, Ph.D.: Paul Whitfield Horn Professor Emerita of Psychology, Department of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, United States. Dr. Hendrick has published extensively on relationship satisfaction, close interpersonal ties, marital communication, and human sexual expression.
• David A. Reich, Ph.D.: Department of Psychology, Texas Tech University / Academic Collaborator on psychometric standardization, gender analyses, and scale reduction protocols.

Institutional Contact for scholarly archives and correspondence regarding the Hendrick assessment archives can be addressed through the Department of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Box 42051, Lubbock, TX 79409-2051, USA.

Purpose

The explicit purpose of the Sexual Attitudes Scale is to provide a standardized, objective, and structurally validated measurement model capable of disaggregating and quantifying the diverse cognitive schemas that people maintain regarding human sexual interaction. Historically, psychometric measures of sexuality treated individual differences through unidimensional paradigms—often labeling individuals along an arbitrary polarity ranging from “sexually repressed/conservative” to “sexually liberated/promiscuous.” Clyde and Susan Hendrick recognized that this binary perspective failed to account for psychological nuance. For example, an individual might maintain deeply liberal, affirming, and tolerant attitudes toward emotional, bonded sexual relationships while strictly rejecting casual, recreational, or multiple-partner intercourse. Conversely, another individual might endorse non-judgmental acceptance of casual encounters while viewing sex purely as physical release rather than as a vehicle for emotional connection.

Consequently, the HSAS and its brief counterpart (BSAS) were constructed to provide behavioral scientists, clinical psychologists, marital and family therapists, and public health researchers with a granular tool capable of differentiating among distinct facets of sexual philosophy. In academic research, the instrument serves several core functions:

• Interpersonal Relationship Research: Examining how attitudinal concordance or discordance between romantic partners influences communication patterns, dyadic coping, infidelity risks, and overall relationship satisfaction.
• Sexology and Gender Studies: Investigating gender socialization, evolutionary psychological predictions regarding mating strategies, sociosexual orientation, and the persistence or mitigation of sexual double standards across cultures.
• Public Health and Behavioral Medicine: Understanding cognitive predictors of condom usage, contraceptive compliance, sexual risk-taking behaviors, and vulnerability to sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among emerging adults.
• Clinical and Sex Therapy Contexts: Assisting clinicians in identifying core discrepancies between partners’ foundational beliefs about sex—such as when one partner conceptualizes intercourse predominantly as emotional communion while the other conceptualizes it primarily as instrumental biological tension reduction.

By assessing Permissiveness, Communion, Instrumentality, and Sexual Practices (or Birth Control in the BSAS), researchers gain an empirical framework for evaluating how sexual worldviews interact with broader personality domains, love styles (e.g., Eros, Ludus, Pragma), attachment styles, and sociocultural changes over time.

Psychological Construct

The conceptual framework underlying the Sexual Attitudes Scale posits that sexual attitudes are multifaceted mental representations comprising cognitive evaluations, affective associations, and behavioral predispositions. Rather than viewing sexual attitudes as a single unitary construct, the scale delineates four distinct conceptual domains:

1. Permissiveness (Casual / Uncommitted Sexuality)

The Permissiveness dimension measures the extent to which an individual views sexual behavior as acceptable outside the boundaries of emotional commitment, love, or exclusivity. High scorers endorse the legitimacy of casual encounters, one-night stands, multiple concurrent partners, and sex without emotional attachment. This dimension captures an openness to sexual freedom and non-traditional relational contracts. For example, items reflecting this construct assess whether one needs to be committed to have sex, whether one-night stands are enjoyable, and whether casual sex is acceptable. Individuals scoring low on permissiveness endorse traditional sexual ethics, maintaining that sexual intimacy should remain exclusively anchored within committed, monogamous romantic partnerships.

2. Sexual Practices (Specific Behavioral Acceptance)

In the original 43-item HSAS (1987), the Sexual Practices subscale captures an individual’s cognitive tolerance and acceptance of specific physical behaviors, educational frameworks, and non-procreative sexual modalities. This includes attitudes toward solo and mutual masturbation, the use of sexual aids or erotica during lovemaking, sex education for adolescents, and progressive sexual techniques. High scores reflect a sexually progressive view that acknowledges and validates non-coital expressions of pleasure. (In the 2006 BSAS revision, this dimension was recalibrated into a focused Birth Control subscale, concentrating on the sharing of contraceptive and reproductive responsibility between partners).

3. Communion (Idealistic, Bonded, and Spiritual Sexuality)

The Communion subscale operationalizes an expressive, idealistic, and deeply relational view of sexual interaction. Rooted in the psychological construct of psychological communion—the drive to merge, connect, and experience union with another—this dimension conceptualizes sex as the supreme culmination of love and communication. High scorers view intercourse as “the merging of two souls,” the ultimate form of interpersonal communion, and a transformative, deeply meaningful human interaction. Communion reflects a sacred or reverent orientation toward intimacy, where physical coupling cannot be separated from profound emotional closeness.

4. Instrumentality (Self-Pleasure, Biological, and Physical Sexuality)

The Instrumentality dimension reflects an orientation toward sex as an instrumental, sensory, and bodily function. Drawing conceptually from psychological instrumentality and physical agency, this construct focuses on physical pleasure, individual release, and the reduction of physiological tension. High scorers conceptualize sex primarily as physical gratification, bodily tension reduction analogous to other primary drives such as hunger, and a self-centered pursuit of physical ecstasy. While sometimes misconstrued as callousness, instrumentality simply captures the endorsement of the sensory, hedonic, and physiological facets of sex independently of sentimental romance.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the Sexual Attitudes Scale is anchored in the convergence of social psychological attitude theory, relationship science, and evolutionary perspectives on mating strategies. Clyde and Susan Hendrick situated their instrument within the broader literature of relational cognition and social exchange.

Multidimensional Attitude Theory

Classic attitude theories (e.g., the tripartite model of attitudes consisting of affect, cognition, and behavior) emphasize that social attitudes organize how individuals interpret social stimuli, make decisions, and guide interpersonal interactions. During the 1970s and 1980s, prevailing measures such as Ira Reiss’s Premarital Sexual Permissiveness Scale primarily measured a single linear spectrum. Hendrick and Hendrick (1987) argued that sexual belief systems mirror the structural complexity of love itself. Just as John Alan Lee’s typology of love styles demonstrated that romantic attachment is multidimensional (comprising passionate Eros, playful Ludus, companionate Storge, practical Pragma, possessive Mania, and selfless Agape), sexual attitudes also exist across distinct psychological dimensions.

The Interplay Between Love and Sex

The scale was developed concurrently with the Hendricks’ research on the Love Attitudes Scale (LAS). Theoretically, the dimensions of the HSAS correspond meaningfully with specific love styles:

• Ludus and Instrumentality/Permissiveness: Individuals endorsing a ludic (game-playing, uncommitted) love style consistently exhibit high scores on Permissiveness and Instrumentality, endorsing uncommitted encounters and detached physical release.
• Eros and Communion: Individuals demonstrating an erotic (passionate, intensely romantic) love style score significantly higher on the Communion dimension, viewing sexual intimacy as the spiritual and emotional zenith of romantic connection.
• Pragma/Storge and Traditional Sex: Practical and companionate lovers often reject high Permissiveness, prioritizing responsible relationship building and stable partner investment.

Evolutionary and Social Structural Perspectives

The theoretical framework also accounts for observed gender differences in human mating strategies. Evolutionary psychology (e.g., David Buss’s Sexual Strategies Theory) suggests that parental investment differentials lead to divergent psychological orientations: males generally exhibit higher inclinations toward short-term, uncommitted mating (higher Permissiveness and Instrumentality), whereas females generally place greater value on long-term commitment, emotional safety, and shared investment (higher Communion and responsible Birth Control orientation). Social structural theory (e.g., Alice Eagly) similarly posits that gender roles and cultural socialization reinforce instrumental agency in men and communal expressiveness in women. The HSAS provides an empirical framework to test both evolutionary and sociocultural hypotheses without reducing sexual behavior to rigid caricatures.

Validity

Extensive psychometric investigations have established robust evidence for the construct validity, convergent validity, discriminant validity, and criterion-related validity of both the HSAS (1987) and the BSAS (2006).

Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Convergent validity has been repeatedly demonstrated through significant correlations with conceptually aligned constructs:

• Sociosexual Orientation: The Permissiveness subscale correlates strongly and positively with the Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI; Simpson & Gangestad), showing coefficients typically ranging between r = .60 and r = .75, confirming that HSAS Permissiveness accurately captures orientation toward uncommitted sexual behavior.
• Love Styles (LAS): Permissiveness demonstrates strong positive correlations with Ludus (game-playing love; r = .40 to .55) and significant negative correlations with traditional commitment measures. Communion demonstrates moderate to high correlations with Eros (passionate love; r = .45 to .60) and Agape (altruistic love), while exhibiting discriminant divergence from Ludus (near-zero or negative correlations).
• Instrumentality: Shows moderate positive associations with Ludus and sensations-seeking measures, but diverges markedly from Communion, confirming that endorsing physical pleasure does not inherently preclude or mirror emotional bonding.

Predictive and Criterion Validity

The predictive utility of the scale has been confirmed in numerous observational, longitudinal, and dyadic studies:

• Behavioral Correlates: High scores on Permissiveness reliably predict a greater number of lifetime sexual partners, earlier age of sexual debut, increased frequency of one-night stands, and higher rates of concurrent relationship dating.
• Relationship Dynamics: In dating and married couples, dyadic alignment on Communion is predictive of higher sexual satisfaction, enhanced marital adjustment, and greater perceived emotional intimacy, as demonstrated by Tammy Lowery Zacchilli (2007) and Susan Hendrick (1988).
• Contraceptive Practices: High scores on the Birth Control subscale reliably correlate with regular, responsible barrier and hormonal contraceptive usage, open communication about sexual health, and proactive STI screening.

Reliability

Both internal consistency reliability and temporal stability (test-retest reliability) of the Sexual Attitudes Scale have been documented across multiple validation samples.

Internal Consistency

In the original 43-item HSAS developmental study (Hendrick & Hendrick, 1987), Cronbach’s alpha coefficients indicated high reliability across all four subscales:

• Permissiveness (21 items): α = .94 (indicating exceptional item homogeneity and measurement precision for casual sexual attitudes).
• Sexual Practices (7 items): α = .71 (acceptable reliability for a diverse set of behavioral topics).
• Communion (9 items): α = .80 (good internal consistency).
• Instrumentality (6 items): α = .80 (good internal consistency).

In the 2006 revision yielding the 23-item Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale (BSAS), Hendrick, Hendrick, and Reich optimized scale efficiency while preserving robust internal reliability:

• Permissiveness (10 items): α = .94
• Communion (5 items): α = .75
• Birth Control (3 items): α = .81
• Instrumentality (5 items): α = .76

Temporal Stability (Test-Retest Reliability)

Test-retest reliability assessed over a four-week interval demonstrated high stability coefficients across all domains:

• Permissiveness: r = .88
• Sexual Practices: r = .80
• Communion: r = .67
• Instrumentality: r = .66

These coefficients confirm that sexual attitudes measured by the instrument represent relatively enduring psychological orientations rather than transient affective states.

Factor Analysis

The structural dimensionality of the Sexual Attitudes Scale was established through iterative exploratory factor analyses (EFA) and subsequently confirmed through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Exploratory Factor Structure (1987)

In the foundational 1987 investigation, Clyde and Susan Hendrick administered an initial pool of over 80 candidate sexual attitude statements to large university cohorts. Principal components analysis followed by orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations revealed a robust four-factor extraction:

• Factor 1 (Permissiveness): Accounted for the largest proportion of total variance (over 25% of explained variance), with salient loadings (> .50) from items endorsing uncommitted sex, multi-partner dating, casual encounters, and non-monogamy.
• Factor 2 (Sexual Practices): Extracted items measuring tolerance for solo masturbation, mutual partner masturbation, erotica/toys, and sex education, with primary loadings ranging between .42 and .68.
• Factor 3 (Communion): Captured statements addressing sex as the ultimate communication, merging of souls, and peak interpersonal bonding, with loadings ranging from .48 to .74.
• Factor 4 (Instrumentality): Extracted statements defining sex as physical release, bodily functioning akin to eating, and self-focused pleasure taking, with loadings between .45 and .71.

Confirmatory Factor Modeling and BSAS Refinement (2006)

In developing the Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale, Hendrick, Hendrick, and Reich (2006) examined the factor structure using both EFA and CFA across multiple independent samples. Items that cross-loaded significantly across multiple factors or exhibited low primary loadings (< .40) were eliminated. The original Sexual Practices factor was refined into a targeted Birth Control subscale to capture practical responsibility. CFA fit indices supported the four-factor oblique model over alternative one-factor or two-factor models:

• Comparative Fit Index (CFI): Values consistently met or exceeded the .90 to .93 threshold across validation cohorts.
• Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA): Values ranged between .048 and .062, falling well within standard criteria for acceptable model fit.
• Standardized Factor Loadings: Standardized regression weights in the CFA model ranged from .52 to .86 across all latent dimensions, confirming strong factorial validity.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Name: Sexual Attitudes Scale (HSAS / BSAS)
• Authors: Clyde Hendrick, Ph.D., Susan S. Hendrick, Ph.D., & David A. Reich, Ph.D.
• Assessment Type: Self-report psychological questionnaire / Likert-type attitude inventory
• Administration Format: Paper-and-pencil questionnaire or computerized / online assessment
• Target Population: Adults and adolescents aged 18 and older (adapted for collegiate, dating, and marital populations)
• Completion Time: Approximately 8–12 minutes for the full 43-item HSAS; 4–6 minutes for the 23-item BSAS
• Number of Items:
  • Full HSAS (1987): 43 items
  • Brief BSAS (2006): 23 items
• Response Continuum: 5-point Likert scale:
  • A = Strongly agree (scored as 1 or 5 depending on coding convention)
  • B = Moderately agree
  • C = Neutral – neither agree nor disagree
  • D = Moderately disagree
  • E = Strongly disagree
• Subscale Distribution (HSAS – 43 Items):
  • Permissiveness: Items 1 to 21
  • Sexual Practices: Items 22 to 28
  • Communion: Items 29 to 37
  • Instrumentality: Items 38 to 43
• Subscale Distribution (BSAS – 23 Items):
  • Permissiveness: Items 1 to 10
  • Birth Control: Items 11 to 13
  • Communion: Items 14 to 18
  • Instrumentality: Items 19 to 23
• Scoring and Reverse Coding:
  • In standard psychometric coding, responses are mapped numerically: A = 5 (Strongly agree), B = 4, C = 3, D = 2, E = 1 (or reversed: A = 1 to E = 5 depending on study directionality).
  • Reverse-Scored Items (HSAS): Items 19, 20, and 21 require reverse scoring prior to subscale computation if higher numerical scores indicate higher permissiveness.
  • Subscale scores are calculated as the mean or sum of all items comprising that factor. Higher subscale scores denote stronger endorsement of that specific sexual attitude domain.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Hendrick Sexual Attitudes Scale was originally published in 1987 in The Journal of Sex Research, and its shortened counterpart, the Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale, was published in 2006. Both instruments are copyrighted by the original authors and the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality (SSSS) / Taylor & Francis.

However, the authors placed these measures in the public academic domain for non-commercial research, empirical investigations, and clinical practice purposes. Qualified researchers and clinicians may utilize, reproduce, and administer the items without payment of royalty fees, provided proper bibliographic attribution is given to Clyde Hendrick and Susan S. Hendrick. Reproduction for commercial software, corporate assessment batteries, or monetized digital publishing requires explicit formal copyright permission from the copyright holders or publishing journals.

References

• Hendrick, C., & Hendrick, S. S. (1987). Multidimensionality of sexual attitudes. The Journal of Sex Research, 23(4), 502–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224498709551387
• Hendrick, C., Hendrick, S. S., & Reich, D. A. (2006). The Brief Sexual Attitudes Scale. The Journal of Sex Research, 43(1), 76–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224490609552299
• Hendrick, S. S., Hendrick, C., & Reich, D. A. (1985). Gender differences in sexual attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(6), 1630–1642. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1630
• Hendrick, S. S. (1988). A generic measure of relationship satisfaction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 50(1), 93–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/352130
• Fischer, J., & Corcoran, K. J. (2007). Measures for Clinical Practice and Research: A Sourcebook (4th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 106–108). Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/measures-for-clinical-practice-and-research-volume-1-9780195304381
• Zacchilli, T. L. (2007). The relationship between conflict and communication, sex, relationship satisfaction, and other relational variables in dating relationships (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University). Texas Tech University Libraries Repository. http://repositories.tdl.org/ttu-ir/bitstream/handle/2346/9978/Zacchilli_Tammy_Diss.pdf

Items of the Scale